Biomarker-directed targeted therapy plus durvalumab in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase 2 umbrella trial.

For patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) tumors without currently targetable molecular alterations, standard-of-care treatment is immunotherapy with anti-PD-(L)1 checkpoint inhibitors, alone or with platinum-doublet therapy. However, not all patients derive durable benefit and resistance to immune checkpoint blockade is common. Understanding mechanisms of resistance-which can include defects in DNA damage response and repair pathways, alterations or functional mutations in STK11/LKB1, alterations in antigen-presentation pathways, and immunosuppressive cellular subsets within the tumor microenvironment-and developing effective therapies to overcome them, remains an unmet need. Here the phase 2 umbrella HUDSON study evaluated rational combination regimens for advanced NSCLC following failure of anti-PD-(L)1-containing immunotherapy and platinum-doublet therapy. A total of 268 patients received durvalumab (anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibody)-ceralasertib (ATR kinase inhibitor), durvalumab-olaparib (PARP inhibitor), durvalumab-danvatirsen (STAT3 antisense oligonucleotide) or durvalumab-oleclumab (anti-CD73 monoclonal antibody). Greatest clinical benefit was observed with durvalumab-ceralasertib; objective response rate (primary outcome) was 13.9% (11/79) versus 2.6% (5/189) with other regimens, pooled, median progression-free survival (secondary outcome) was 5.8 (80% confidence interval 4.6-7.4) versus 2.7 (1.8-2.8) months, and median overall survival (secondary outcome) was 17.4 (14.1-20.3) versus 9.4 (7.5-10.6) months. Benefit with durvalumab-ceralasertib was consistent across known immunotherapy-refractory subgroups. In ATM-altered patients hypothesized to harbor vulnerability to ATR inhibition, objective response rate was 26.1% (6/23) and median progression-free survival/median overall survival were 8.4/22.8 months. Durvalumab-ceralasertib safety/tolerability profile was manageable. Biomarker analyses suggested that anti-PD-L1/ATR inhibition induced immune changes that reinvigorated antitumor immunity. Durvalumab-ceralasertib is under further investigation in immunotherapy-refractory NSCLC.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03334617.

Comparative Review of Approved Melatonin Agonists for the Treatment of Circadian Rhythm Sleep-Wake Disorders.

Circadian rhythm sleep-wake disorders (CRSWDs) are characterized by persistent or recurrent patterns of sleep disturbance related primarily to alterations of the circadian rhythm system or the misalignment between the endogenous circadian rhythm and exogenous factors that affect the timing or duration of sleep. These disorders collectively represent a significant unmet medical need, with a total prevalence in the millions, a substantial negative impact on quality of life, and a lack of studied treatments for most of these disorders. Activation of the endogenous melatonin receptors appears to play an important role in setting the circadian clock in the suprachiasmatic nucleus of the hypothalamus. Therefore, melatonin agonists, which may be able to shift and/or stabilize the circadian phase, have been identified as potential therapeutic candidates for the treatment of CRSWDs. Currently, only one melatonin receptor agonist, tasimelteon, is approved for the treatment of a CRSWD: non-24-hour sleep-wake disorder (or non-24). However, three additional commercially available melatonin receptor agonists-agomelatine, prolonged-release melatonin, and ramelteon-have been investigated for potential use for treatment of CRSWDs. Data indicate that these melatonin receptor agonists have distinct pharmacologic profiles that may help clarify their clinical use in CRSWDs. We review the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of these melatonin agonists and summarize their efficacy profiles when used for the treatment of CRSWDs. Further studies are needed to determine the therapeutic potential of these melatonin agonists for most CRSWDs.

Tasimelteon for non-24-hour sleep-wake disorder in totally blind people (SET and RESET): two multicentre, randomised, double-masked, placebo-controlled phase 3 trials.

BACKGROUND: Most totally blind people have non-24-hour sleep-wake disorder (non-24), a rare circadian rhythm disorder caused by an inability of light to reset their circadian pacemaker. In two consecutive placebo-controlled trials (SET and RESET), we assessed safety and efficacy (in terms of circadian entrainment and maintenance) of once-daily tasimelteon, a novel dual-melatonin receptor agonist. METHODS: We undertook the placebo-controlled, randomised, double-masked trials in 27 US and six German clinical research centres and sleep centres. We screened totally blind adults (18-75 years of age), who were eligible for the randomisation phase of SET if they had a non-24-hour circadian period (τ) of 24·25 h or longer (95% CI greater than 24·0 and up to 24·9 h), as calculated from measurements of urinary 6-sulphatoxymelatonin rhythms. For SET, we used block randomisation to assign patients (1:1) to receive tasimelteon (20 mg) or placebo every 24 h at a fixed clock time 1 h before target bedtime for 26 weeks. Patients who entered the open-label group receiving tasimelteon in SET or who did not meet the SET inclusion criteria but did meet the RESET inclusion criteria were screened for RESET. A subset of the patients who entered the open-label group before the RESET study and who had eligible τ values were screened for RESET after completing the open-label treatment. In RESET, we withdrew tasimelteon in a randomised manner (1:1) in patients who responded (ie, entrained) after a tasimelteon run-in period. Entrainment was defined as having τ of 24·1 h or less and a 95% CI that included 24·0 h. In SET, the primary endpoint was the proportion of entrained patients, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. The planned step-down primary endpoint assessed the proportion of patients who had a clinical response (entrainment at month 1 or month 7 plus clinical improvement, measured by the Non-24 Clinical Response Scale). In RESET, the primary endpoint was the proportion of non-entrained patients, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety assessments included adverse events and clinical laboratory measures, assessed in all treated patients. These trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT01163032 and NCT01430754. FINDINGS: Between Aug 25, 2010, and July 5, 2012, we screened 391 totally blind patients for SET, of whom 84 (22%) were assigned to receive tasimelteon (n=42) or placebo (n=42). Two patients in the tasimelteon group and four in the placebo group discontinued the study before τ was measured, due to adverse events, withdrawal of consent, and a protocol deviation. Circadian entrainment occurred in eight (20%) of 40 patients in the tasimelteon group compared with one (3%) of 38 patients in the placebo group at month 1 (difference 17%, 95% CI 3·2-31·6; p=0·0171). Nine (24%) of 38 patients showed a clinical response, compared with none of 34 in the placebo group (difference 24%, 95% CI 8·4-39·0; p=0·0028). Between Sept 15, 2011, and Oct 4, 2012, we screened 58 patients for eligibility in RESET, 48 (83%) of whom had τ assessed and entered the open-label tasimelteon run-in phase. 24 (50%) patients entrained, and 20 (34%) were enrolled in the randomisation phase. Two (20%) of ten patients who were withdrawn to placebo remained entrained compared with nine (90%) of ten who continued to receive tasimelteon (difference 70%, 95% CI 26·4-100·0; p=0·0026). No deaths were reported in either study, and discontinuation rates due to adverse events were comparable between the tasimelteon (3 [6%] of 52 patients) and placebo (2 [4%] of 52 patients) treatment courses. The most common side-effects associated with tasimelteon in SET were headache (7 [17%] of 42 patients given tasimelteon vs 3 [7%] of 42 patients given placebo), elevated liver enzymes (4 [10%] vs 2 [5%]), nightmares or abnormal dreams (4 [10%] vs none), upper respiratory tract infection (3 [7%] vs none], and urinary tract infections (3 [7%] vs 1 [2%]). INTERPRETATION: Once-daily tasimelteon can entrain totally blind people with non-24; however, continued tasimelteon treatment is necessary to maintain these improvements. FUNDING: Vanda Pharmaceuticals.

Safety profile of tasimelteon, a melatonin MT1 and MT2 receptor agonist: pooled safety analyses from six clinical studies.

INTRODUCTION: Tasimelteon, a novel circadian regulator, is the first product for the treatment of Non-24-hour Sleep-Wake Disorder (Non-24) approved by either the FDA or the European Medicines Agency (EMA). Tasimelteon is a potent and specific melatonin (MT1 and MT2) receptor agonist with 2 - 4 times greater affinity for the MT2 receptor. METHODS: Safety was assessed in two controlled and two open-label studies in blind individuals with Non-24 and in two controlled studies of primary insomnia. Periodic assessments included collection of adverse events (AEs), laboratory testing, electrocardiograms (ECGs), vital sign monitoring, physical examinations and assessment for the potential for suicide. One study included additional assessments for endocrine function. RESULTS: A total of 184 blind individuals with Non-24 received tasimelteon nightly with a median exposure > 1 year. In placebo-controlled studies, 387 patients with insomnia and 42 patients with Non-24 received tasimelteon nightly for 4 - 26 weeks. The total patient years exposure for the six studies assessed here is 258.64 patient years. Discontinuations due to AEs were similar across treatment groups. Overall in the clinical studies described here, AEs attributable to tasimelteon treatment were headache, diarrhea, dry mouth, alanine aminotransferase increased, somnolence, dizziness and nightmare/abnormal dreams. There were no clinically significant differences in treatment group with ECGs, vital signs, withdrawal, endocrine function and suicidality assessments. CONCLUSION: Long-term tasimelteon administration was safe and well-tolerated. This is supported by placebo-controlled data in both Non-24 and insomnia patients.

Clinical assessment of drug-drug interactions of tasimelteon, a novel dual melatonin receptor agonist.

Tasimelteon ([1R-trans]-N-[(2-[2,3-dihydro-4-benzofuranyl] cyclopropyl) methyl] propanamide), a novel dual melatonin receptor agonist that demonstrates specificity and high affinity for melatonin receptor types 1 and 2 (MT1 and MT2 receptors), is the first treatment approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for Non-24-Hour Sleep-Wake Disorder. Tasimelteon is rapidly absorbed, with a mean absolute bioavailability of approximately 38%, and is extensively metabolized primarily by oxidation at multiple sites, mainly by cytochrome P450 (CYP) 1A2 and CYP3A4/5, as initially demonstrated by in vitro studies and confirmed by the results of clinical drug-drug interactions presented here. The effects of strong inhibitors and moderate or strong inducers of CYP1A2 and CYP3A4/5 on the pharmacokinetics of tasimelteon were evaluated in humans. Coadministration with fluvoxamine resulted in an approximately 6.5-fold increase in tasimelteon's area under the curve (AUC), whereas cigarette smoking decreased tasimelteon's exposure by approximately 40%. Coadministration with ketoconazole resulted in an approximately 54% increase in tasimelteon's AUC, whereas rifampin pretreatment resulted in a decrease in tasimelteon's exposure of approximately 89%.

Absolute Bioavailability of Tasimelteon.

Tasimelteon is a novel dual melatonin receptor agonist and is the first treatment approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for Non-24-Hour Sleep-Wake Disorder. This study was conducted to assess the absolute bioavailability of tasimelteon and to further assess the single-dose pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of oral and intravenous (IV) routes of administration of the drug. This study was an open-label, single-dose, randomized, 2-period, 2-treatment, 2-sequence, crossover study in which 14 healthy volunteers were randomly administered tasimelteon as either a 20-mg capsule or IV administration of 2 mg infused over 30 minutes. Each subject received both treatments in a random order, separated by a washout period of 5 ± 2 days. The total clearance and volume of distribution of tasimelteon, from the IV treatment, were 505 mL per minute and 42.7 L, respectively. Based on the statistical comparison of dose-corrected area under the curve to infinity, the absolute bioavailability was 38%, with a 90% confidence interval of 27%-54%. The mean elimination half-life was the same for the oral and IV routes. The exposure ratios, oral-to-IV, for metabolites M9, M11, M12, and M13, were 133.27%, 118.28%, 138.76%, and 112.36%, respectively, suggesting presystemic or first-pass metabolism. Three (21.4%) subjects experienced a treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) during the study. All TEAEs were mild, considered related to study medication, and consistent with what has been seen in other studies. There were no deaths, serious adverse events, or discontinuations due to TEAEs. Both tasimelteon treatments were well tolerated during the study.

Correlation of major cytogenetic response with a pharmacogenetic marker in chronic myeloid leukemia patients treated with imatinib (STI571).

PURPOSE: Imatinib, an inhibitor of the Bcr-Abl tyrosine kinase, is indicated for the treatment of patients with Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic myeloid leukemia. We examined genotypes from patients enrolled in the International Randomized Study of IFN-alpha versus STI571 in an attempt to identify factors that associate with cytogenetic response. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Sixty-eight polymorphic loci in 26 genes were examined in a subset of 187 patients (imatinib-treated patients, n = 113; IFN + 1-beta-D-arabinofuranosylcytosine-treated patients, n = 74). Correlations between genotype and major cytogenetic response (MCyR) were examined by Fisher's exact tests. Multivariate and survival analyses were also performed. RESULTS: A significant association between MCyR and the rs2290573 polymorphism mapped to 15q22.33 was observed in imatinib-treated patients (P = 0.00037, Bonferroni corrected P = 0.025). Individuals with a CC genotype at this locus had a MCyR rate of 52% compared with individuals with a CT or TT genotype that had a MCyR rate of 89% (odds ratio, 6.72; 95% confidence interval, 1.51-29.91). In a multivariate analysis, the rs2290573 polymorphism was significant, whereas Sokal score was not. Time to progression analysis illustrated a significant difference based on genotype for the rs2290573 polymorphism. CONCLUSIONS: A significant association was identified between the genetic polymorphism rs2290573 and MCyR in imatinib-treated patients. This polymorphism is located in the intronic sequence of a putative gene with a tyrosine kinase domain. Multivariate analysis suggests that an individual's genotype for rs2290573 has more predictive value for MCyR than prognostic variables such as Sokal score. The clinical relevance of these results requires validation in future clinical trials.

Pharmacogenomic analysis of cytogenetic response in chronic myeloid leukemia patients treated with imatinib.

PURPOSE: To better understand the molecular basis of cytogenetic response in chronic myeloid leukemia patients treated with imatinib, we studied gene expression profiles from a total of 100 patients from a large, multinational Phase III clinical trial (International Randomized Study of IFN-alpha versus STI571). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Gene expression data for >12,000 genes were generated from whole blood samples collected at baseline (before imatinib treatment) using Affymetrix oligonucleotide microarrays. Cytogenetic response was determined based on the percentage of Ph(+) cells from bone marrow following a median of 13 months of treatment. RESULTS: A genomic profile of response was developed using a subset of individuals that exhibited the greatest divergence in cytogenetic response; those with complete response (0% Ph(+) cells; n = 53) and those with minimal or no response (>65% Ph(+) cells; n = 13). A total of 55 genes was identified that were differentially expressed between these two groups. Using a "leave-one-out" strategy, we identified the optimum 31 genes from this list to use as our genomic profile of response. Using this genomic profile, we were able to distinguish between individuals that achieved major cytogenetic response (0-35% Ph(+) cells) and those that did not, with a sensitivity of 93.4% (71 of 76 patients), specificity of 58.3% (14 of 24 patients), positive predictive value of 87.7%, and negative predictive value of 73.7%. CONCLUSIONS: Interestingly, many of the genes identified appear to be strongly related to reported mechanisms of BCR-ABL transformation and warrant additional research as potential drug targets. The validity and clinical implications of these results should be explored in future studies.

Gene expression profiling detects gene amplification and differentiates tumor types in breast cancer.

Global gene expression analysis using microarrays has been used to characterize the molecular profile of tumors. Gene expression variability at the mRNA level can be caused by a number of different events, including novel signaling, downstream activation of transcription enhancers or silencers, somatic mutation, and genetic amplification or deletion. Genomic amplifications are commonly observed in cancer and often include known oncogenes. The tyrosine kinase-type cell surface receptor, ERBB2, is an oncogene located on chromosome 17q21.1 that is amplified in 10-40% of breast tumors. We report for the first time that phenylethanolamine N-methyltransferase (PNMT), proteasome subunit, beta type 3 (PSMB3), ribosomal protein L19 (RPL19), and nuclear receptor subfamily 1, group D, member 1 (NR1D1) are coexpressed with ERBB2 in 34 breast cancer biopsies and also mapped within the same chromosomal location as the ERBB2 gene. Consistent with previous reports, we also observed that the steroidogenic acute regulatory protein-related gene, MLN64, and growth factor receptor bound protein 7 were coexpressed with ERBB2. Coexpression and colocalization of PNMT and MLN64 with ERBB2 suggested that the amplification of ERBB2 includes the chromosomal region harboring these genes. This hypothesis was validated in a subset of 12 biopsies. Gene amplification of ERBB2, PNMT, and MLN64 significantly correlated with increased mRNA gene expression (P < 0.05). These results suggest that gene expression profiling of breast biopsies may become a valuable method for adequately characterizing and choosing treatment modality for patients with breast cancer.